121 Ant Diversity in an urban garden at Mumbai, Maharashtra Kashmira Khot, Goldin Quadros* and Vaishali Somani** Zoology Department, Maharshi Dayanand College, Parel, Mumbai-12. *Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu. [email protected] Abstract : Ants are considered as one of the most diverse, abundant and ecologically significant organisms on earth. The parks, gardens and small patches of natural vegetation provide suitable environment for ecological communities in urban habitats, like Mumbai. The diversity of ants (Hymenoptera) was studied in 2010-2012, at Maharashtra Nature Park Society (MNPS), Mumbai. During the present study, 28 species of ants representing six subfamilies- Aenictinae, Dolichoderinae, Formicinae, Myrmicinae, Ponerinae and Pseudomyrmicinae were recorded. The highest diversity was exhibited by the subfamily Myrmicinae with eleven ant species represented by seven genera. The ants belonging to Crematogaster spp. exhibited the highest diversity, represented by four species. This was followed by Formicinae with 28% contribution and represented by six genera and eight species including the invasive ants, Black crazy ants, Red Fire Ants and Yellow crazy ants. Ten ant species were commonly observed at Maharashtra Nature Park, four species of Myrmicinae, four of Formicinae and one each from Dolichoderinae and Pseudomyrmicinae. Common occurrence of Tetraponera rufonigra (Family: Pseudomyrmicinae), an arboreal species, at Maharashtra Nature Park indicated availability of suitable trees providing microhabitats for the species at this site. Two species of Diacamma and two species of Leptogenys (Family: Ponerinae) were occasionally recorded at Maharashtra Nature Park. These are predator species indicating availability of prey organisms at this site. Key words : Ant species, distribution, classification, urbanization, disturbance gradient, indicator species. Introduction al., 2010, Gomez and Abril, 2011). Biodiversity deals with the life of different living organisms on the planet earth, their homes or habitats, and the systems that support them. It also deals with the complex interaction and interdependence on each other. Under the current scenario of biodiversity loss, and in order to preserve it, it is essential to achieve a deep understanding on all the aspects related to the biological interactions, including their functioning and significance. Overall literature survey indicates that, there exists extensive research on several aspects of insect diversity with more emphasis on the Lepidopterans, beetles of household compost vegetation of Maharashtra. There is a neglect to Myrmecology i.e. the study of ants in and around Mumbai. Hence the present study to document the diversity of ants is undertaken. The sampling area selected was Maharashtra Nature Park Society, Sion, Mumbai According to Quadros et al., (2009), the studies of biodiversity have now assumed greater significance as ecologists try desperately to document global biodiversity in the face of unprecedented perturbations, habitat loss and extinction rates. Biodiversity is intrinsically valuable as a means of improving our understanding of the structure and functioning of ecological communities (McArthur and Kitchen, 2007). Material and Methods The fauna forms an important aspect in biodiversity studies and mainly comprises of invertebrates and vertebrates. Invertebrates are the most successful and prolific animals on the planet. Among invertebrates, insects are the most numerous and diverse organisms on Earth. Moreover, because many insects are highly mobile, their presence in an ecosystem may be temporary, thus reducing the ability of biological monitoring to detect changes. Being less transient, many researchers have turned using ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and ant functional groups as bioindicators (Andersen, 1997; Stephens and Wagner, 2006; Underwood and Fisher, 2006; Majer et al., 2007, Fagan et ISBN : 978-81-923628-1-6 Maharashtra Nature Park Society (Latitude 19° 02’N; longitude 72° 48’E) is 15 hectare (37 acres) manmade park on garbage dump resembling a mini forest. This vegetated area provides suitable environment for ecological communities in urban habitats, like Mumbai. Insects can be effectively used to assess biodiversity status of these ecosystems. The study transect approximately measured about 1023 feet. This area is characterized with number of trees and human influence due to the park visitors. Hand picking method was employed for the collection of specimens because it is less labour intensive, does not involve time consuming placement of pitfall traps and can be safely used in too wet or with heavy disturbance activities. Ellison et al., (2007), has discussed comparisons of sampling efficiency by hand collecting accumulates species more efficiently than other commonly used pitfall traps or baits. Sampling was done in premonsoon, monsoon and post monsoon periods National Conference on Biodiversity : Status and Challenges in Conservation - ‘FAVEO’ 2013 122 from December 2010 to January 2012 of morning as well as later afternoons. 5 samples of each ant were collected using gloves and were transferred to vials with 70% ethyl alcohol and glycerol for preservation. Forceps and brush were used for collection. These specimens were mounted using standard procedure for identification using light microscope as well as compound microscope in the laboratory. The individuals were identified up to species level, using Narendra and Kumar, (2006) and Tiwari, (1998). Ant Web was used for confirmation of species. The ant nests in the study transect were recorded by observing nest entries and movements. Nests were categorized as suggested by Amarasinghe (2010). The flora of the study site was identified with help of botanists, and using keys, Cook (1967) and Randhawa (2004). Observation During the study, twenty eight ant species were recorded in Maharashtra Nature Park represented in the following Table 1. Table 1. List of ant species recorded Sr No 1 2 3 4 Common name Lesser Army ants (Aenictinae) Odour ant (Dolichoderinae) White footed ghost ant (Dolichoderinae) Common. Godzilla ant (Formicinae) 5 Golden backed ant (Formicinae) 6 Pentagonal ant (Formicinae) 7 Red antler ant (Formicinae) 8 Common. Bullhorn ant (Formicinae) 9 Black crazy ant (Formicinae) 10 11 12 13 Yellow crazy ant (Formicinae) Weaver ants (Formicinae) Tetramorium species (Myrmicinae) Miniscule house ant (Myrmicinae) 14 Red fire ant (Myrmicinae) 15 Glossy slender acrobat ant (Myrmicinae) 16 Crematogaster sp (Myrmicinae) 17 18 19 Common. Broad acrobat ant (Myrmicinae) Crematogaster species (Myrmicinae) Silky shield ant (Myrmicinae) ISBN : 978-81-923628-1-6 Scientific name Aenictus ceylonicus Tapinoma melanocephalum Technomyrmex albipes Camponotus compressus Camponotus sericeus Lepisiota frauenfeldi Lepisiota opaca Polyrhachis lacteipennis Paratrechina longicornis Anoplolepis gracilipes Oecophylla smaragdina Tetramorium bicarinatum Tetramorium smithi Solenopsis geminata Crematogaster ransonneti Crematogaster sp 1 Crematogaster subnuda Crematogaster rothneyi Meranoplus bicolor Occurrence Premonsoon Monsoon Postmonsoon Occasional + - - Common + + + Occasional + - - Common + + + Seasonal + - + Occasional + - - Occasional - - + Seasonal + - + Common + + + Common + + + Common + + + Occasional + - - Occasional + - - Common + + + Seasonal - + + Occasional + - - Common + + + Occasional + - - Seasonal + - + National Conference on Biodiversity : Status and Challenges in Conservation - ‘FAVEO’ 2013 123 ( y ) 19 Silky shield ant (Myrmicinae) 20 Pharaoh ant (Myrmicinae) 21 Spiny harvester ant (Myrmicinae) 22 Deceptive. Serrated ant (Myrmicinae) 23 Diacamma species (Ponerinae) 24 Lesser striated bispinous ant (Ponerinae) 25 Procession ant (Ponerinae) 26 27 28 Slender jawed sail ant (Ponerinae) Shy spineless bark ant (Ponerinae) Arboreal bicoloured ant (Pseudomyrmicinae) y Meranoplus bicolor Monomorium pharaonis Pheidole watsoni Seasonal + - + Seasonal + + - Common + + + Common + + + Seasonal + - + Seasonal + - + Seasonal + + - Seasonal + - + Platythyrei sagei Occasional + - - Tetraponera rufonigra Common + + + 26 13 18 Cataulacus taprobanae Diacamma ceylonense Diacamma rugosum Leptogenys processionalis Leptogenys chinensis Table 1. The above table indicates seasonal data, where (+) indicates presence of ants while (-) indicates absence of ants. Table 2. Percentage contribution of various subfamilies Subfamily Species Percentage (%) Myrmicina e 11 39.28 Formicina e 8 28.57 Ponerinae 5 17.85 Dolichoderinae 2 7.14 Aenictinae 1 3.58 Pseudomyrmicina e 1 3.58 The nests observed were classified based on the location using the key described by Amarasinghe (2010). 1] Subterranean nests (S) – Cone or mound, Result And Discussion During the present study, we recorded 28 species of ants representing six subfamilies- Aenictinae, Dolichoderinae, Formicinae, Myrmicinae, Ponerinae and Pseudomyrmicinae. The highest diversity was by the subfamily Myrmicinae with eleven ant species represented by seven genera. The ants belonging to Crematogaster spp. exhibited the highest diversity, represented by four species. This was followed by Formicinae with 28% contribution and represented by six genera and eight species including the Invasive ants, Black crazy ants, Red Fire Ants and Yellow crazy ants. Fig 1.1– Maharashtra Nature Park Society 2] Arboreal nests (A) – Made with leaves among living tree 3] Lignicolous (LG) – Constructed in or outside stems of living plants and among dead decaying leaf litter. Paratrechina longicornis, Tapinoma melanocephalum, Cataulacus taprobanae, Crematogaster subnuda species were observed with arboreal nesting. Solenopsis geminata, Pheidole watsoni followed Subterranean nesting, while lignicolous nesting was seen in Tetraponera rufonigra, Meranoplus bicolour, Camponotus compressus. These were found in association with different plants, the plants diversity in MNPS is found to be varied and rich with 59 species of trees in the study area. ISBN : 978-81-923628-1-6 National Conference on Biodiversity : Status and Challenges in Conservation - ‘FAVEO’ 2013 125 Acknowledgements The authors thank the Dy. Director Mr. Avinash Kubal and the authorities of MNPS for the necessary permission while doing the study. We are also thankful to the Principal and staff of Zoology Department, M.D. college for their continuous support. The first author is also thankful to the Principal and HOD-Zoology of Ramniranjan Jhunjhunwala college, Mumbai for their encouragement during the study. References Amarasinghe Harindra.E and Edirisinghe, JP. (2006) Diversity and Distribution of ants in Meewatura Agriculture Farm at Peradeniya University Park. Proceeding of the Annual Research Sessions of the University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka 11:136-37. Davidson D.W. (1997) The role of resource imbalance in the evolutionary ecology of tropical arboreal ants. Biological Journal of the Linnean society 61: 153-181. Fagan K.C., R. F. Pywell, J. M. Bullock, and R. H. Marrs. (2010) Are ants useful indicators of restoration success in temperate grasslands? Restoration Ecology 18:373–379. Gomez C and S. Abril. ( 2011) Selective logging in public pine forests of the central Iberian Peninsula: effects of the recovery process on ant assemblages. Forest Ecology and Management 262:1061–1066. Kumar and Archana Mishra (2008) Ant community variation in urban and agricultural ecosystems in Vadodara District (Gujarat State), western India. Asian Myrmecology Volume 2, 85-93. Amarasinghe Harindra. E. (2010) Species composition and nesting habitats of ants in a hill-country home garden in Sri Lanka. Asian Myrmecology Volume 3, 9-20. Majer J.D., G. Orabi and L. Bisevac. (2007) Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) pass the bioindicator scorecard. Myrmecological News 10:69–76. Andersen Alan.N. (1997) Using ants as bioindicators: multiscale issues in ant community ecology. Conservation Ecology Vol.1 Issue 1. Art 8. McArthur and Kitchen, E.D. (2000) Applicability of Montreal Process Criterion 2—productive capacity—to rangeland sustainability International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology. 7: 97–106. Barve Savitha S. and P. Davidar (2008) Response of ants to disturbance gradients in and around Banglore, India Tropical Ecology 49(2): 235-243. Bhagat Kaustubh., Gauri. Gurav, and Goldin Quadros, (2009) Diversity of Ant Fauna (Family: Formicidae) in IIT- Bombay Campus. In The Proceedings of the Seminar on “Wonderful World of Insects”. Organized by B.N. Bandodkar College of Science, Thane pp 82-84. Chavhan Arvind and S.S. Pawar (2011) Distribution and diversity of ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in and around Amravati city of Maharashtra, India. World Journal of Zoology 6 (4): 395-400. Cook. T. (1967) The flora of Presdidency of Bombay (2nd edition) Vol.1, 2 and 3. Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta (Publi). Cushman. J.H., Compton, S.G., Zachariades, C. 1998. Geographic and taxonomic distribution of a positive interaction: ant-tended homopterans indirectly benefit figs across Southern Africa. Oecologia 116: 373-380. ISBN : 978-81-923628-1-6 Narendra Ajay and Kumar Sunil. (2006) On a Trail with Ants. A Handbook of the Ants of Peninsular India. Pp, 1-193. Quadros Goldin, Gauri Gurav, Kaustubh Bhagat, Alok Chorghe, Aniruddha Dhamorikar, Kashmira Khot and Manoj Nagarkar (2009) “Study of the Biodiversity of Indian Institute of Technology Bombay Campus”. Pp 1-158. Randhawa S.M. (1967) Flowering trees, Published by Sanchalak, National Book Trust India. Pp-201. Stephens S.S., and M.R.Wagner. (2006) Using ground foraging ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) functional groups as bioindicators of forest health in northern Arizona ponderosa pine forests. Environmental Entomology 35:937–949. Tiwari R.N., B.G. Kundu, S. Roy Choudhury and S.N. Ghosh, (1998). Insecta: Hymenoptera: Formicidae. State Fauna Series 3, Zoological Survey of India, Fauna of West Bengal 8:211-294. Underwood E.C and B. L. Fischer (2006) The role of ants in the conservation monitoring: if, when and how. Biological Conservation 132: 166-182. National Conference on Biodiversity : Status and Challenges in Conservation - ‘FAVEO’ 2013